Welcome

Never before in the history of this nation have so many been so apathetic about the freedoms and liberties bestowed upon them today by the blood and sacrifice of those before them.

Far too many today think of "tyranny" as being something only wielded by Kings and Queens of old or dictators in far away lands.

Yet tyranny comes in many forms, not the least of which is a central government that places its wants, its needs above the rights and liberties of the common citizen.

The meme of the legacy print media, the broadcast networks and the professional political class is that the Tea Party and anyone who dare associate with such is so "far right", "extreme", and "radical" they must be ridiculed, viled, and slandered at every opportunity else a modern American apocalypse is imminent.

And at this moment in history with pop culture being what it is, an educational system promoting ignorance over achievement, and economic conditions at their worst since the Great Depression, the number of minds susceptible to such propaganda has never been larger.

But who represents the true "radical", "extreme" "un-American" position?

The group that is fighting to revitalize the Constitution, raise awareness of the founding principles that birthed that Constitution, and protect the rights and liberties bestowed therein or a minority ruling establishment that desires only the continuance of its power and influence at all cost?

If you're of the former, WELCOME. You'll find yourself right at home here.

If you're of the latter, welcome as well. Yes, you're going to feel a little uncomfortable at first, but give it some time.

Share

Jay Carney may be President Obama’s press secretary but it’s becoming harder and harder with each passing day to tell the difference between him and that loveable, affable, laughable, most deniable denier of them all: Iraq’s very own, Baghdad Bob.

In the video at left ABC’s Jake Tapper takes Carney to task for praising “aggressive journalism” overseas while the administration itself is being overly aggressive to shut it down here at home.

Today’s press briefing was no better as Carney, Bob started out with this whopper:

Before I get started I just wanted to note that — as the President predicted last week when he gave a speech at the University of Miami — upon its return to Washington, Congress, or at least some members in Congress, are politicizing the issue of gas prices. The Speaker of the House apparently spoke with reporters this morning in which he suggested that the President wasn’t in support of expanding domestic oil and gas production, which is demonstrably, categorically false — and suggested that somehow simply by drilling or approving the Keystone XL pipeline, that that would lower gas prices, that would lower prices at the pump. And that’s the kind of empty promise that politicians make when we face hikes in the global price of oil that is really dishonest, the kind of promise that — promises that are dishonest with the American people.

So as you know, the President has from the beginning supported an all-of-the-above approach to our energy challenges that includes expanding domestic oil and gas production. As you know, oil and gas production has been up all three years that he’s been in office. It includes investing in alternative energy sources — renewables, wind, solar, biofuels. It includes approving the construction of the first nuclear power plant in this country in 30 years. It includes encouraging the construction of pipelines domestically like the one that the company TransCanada announced it intends to build from Cushing, Oklahoma to the Gulf of Mexico.

That’s the approach the President takes. He, being honest with the American people, makes clear that there are no silver bullets here, there are no quick fixes. We need an all-of-the-above approach to increase our energy independence and make America stronger economically in the 21st century.

Yes, you got that right. In Bob’s Jay’s and by proxy the President’s thinking you can have an “all of the above” approach without actually INCLUDING “all of the above” in the options.

The charade continued without missing a beat:

Julie, I’ll take your first question.

Q Thank you. Was the President’s speech to the UAW convention this morning a campaign speech?

MR. CARNEY: Not at all. The President was speaking to American workers, which he certainly enjoys doing. He was speaking to them about several things, principally the resurrection of the American automobile industry, which is a subject that has been a focus of his attention since he took office when he made some very difficult decisions to ensure that General Motors and Chrysler would restructure themselves, make themselves more efficient; that unions and management would make very tough decisions, and in return for taxpayer support — would do that in return for taxpayer support. Those decisions saved a million jobs in this country.

And the President is very gratified by the fact that General Motors is once again the number-one automaker in the world, that Chrysler is the fastest-growing automaker in the world, that Ford is expanding its workforce and bringing jobs home from overseas, that American car companies have produced — not just selling cars, they’re making really good cars that out-compete around the world. And that is a subject that is very important to him.

No one with more than one brain cell can read the President’s speech and see it for nothing but the blatant campaign appearance that it was. But what makes it even worse is Carney still touting Chrysler as if it’s an American company. Chrysler is now majority owned by Italian automaker Fiat and achieved that status through the actions of this very administration. (No, no, there are no troops in the outskirts of Baghdad, all is calm, the Iraqi army stands ready to repel any “supposed” invasion.)

And the suspension of reality continued:

Q But the speech today wasn’t just the President touting the auto bailout. He spent a good amount of time using rhetoric that we hear in his campaign fundraising speeches. He took some shots at politicians who didn’t support the bailout. We know that some of the Republican candidates fall on that side. I just wonder why the White House is so reluctant to acknowledge that the President might be focused on the campaign.

MR. CARNEY: Well, look, there’s no question that the issue of the saving of the automobile industry in the United States is a subject of — in the news and a subject of debate. There’s no question about that. And the President is very proud of the decisions that he made that were difficult, that were not popular at the time. The fact that he’s been talking about the need to do this from the beginning, in 2009, and now other politicians are talking about it and making their opinions known about it — I mean, I think you have to look at cause and effect here.

Of course the President is “very proud of the decisions that he made”.

No other President in American history just kicked bondholders to the curb in favor of pandering to his base and delivering political payback to his unions.

No other President in history lost billions in taxpayer money in “fake” bailouts that did not need to be.

No other President in history could speak with a straight face while bold face lying about what really happened and what he actually did.

Of course the President is “very proud” of such decisions, that’s just who he is. But even with Dear Leader’s skill at lying directly into the camera it’s not easy to keep the press at bay.

But then again, no other President in history has Jay Carney Baghdad Bob as a press secretary.

When you’ve got someone that good at dodging the issues, faking the facts, and ignoring the obvious, why worry about the truth?

Why all the blather, that reinforced the view that in fact it was a campaign speech justifying actions three years ago, not proposing new actions? Why try to spin it other wise? Money! DNC did not want to foot the bill for the trip to Miami. They got the taxpayers to do it for them.

Now if the President makes a decision about, say, what to do if Israel attacks Iran, fine and informing America of that decision would not be a campaign speech. But when he runs around at taxpayer expense trying to justify past decisions, such is nothing more than campaign rhetoric in my view. and the DNC should pay for it, lock, stock and barrel.

Anson

Geoff Caldwell on February 29, 2012 at 10:12 am

Couldn’t agree more. And as far as I’m concerned this isn’t an Obama only issue. I don’t care what party the President is, the practice of “bundling” a less than honest “policy” appearance during the day so the taxpayer pays for the travel to the $33,000 a plate fundraiser at night is not only hypocritical it’s an abuse of power.
It goes back to your previous comments and posts regarding “leadership”. A true “leader” whether it be Obama or the Republican nominee would stop it or pledge to stop it.
A recent snippet from ABC News:
“(ABC News) – President Obama jets to Florida today for a mix of official and political business that will steal some headlines in the Sunshine State and line his campaign coffers with at least $4 million.
The act of presidential piggybacking — coupling official duties, in this case a speech on the economy, with political fundraising — was not pioneered by Obama but is prominently on display this year.
Obama has taken four trips outside Washington, D.C., since Jan. 1, including 18 re-election fundraisers interspersed with various activities related to his duties as president. Most recently, Obama concluded a three-day, three-state swing when he attended eight fundraisers and two official events.
The president’s jet-setting has drawn the usual criticisms from his political opponents but also raised the curiosity and questions from taxpayers about who bears the sky-high costs.”

I guess I’m confused (no surprise there.) Didn’t Reagan and the Bushes 41 and 43 also use Air Force One to fly to fundraisers? Seriously, I don’t know. But If they did, then why is Obama’s abuse of taxpayers money any worse that his Republican predecessors???

And did you not read:
Couldn’t agree more. And as far as I’m concerned this isn’t an Obama only issue. I don’t care what party the President is, the practice of “bundling” a less than honest “policy” appearance during the day so the taxpayer pays for the travel to the $33,000 a plate fundraiser at night is not only hypocritical it’s an abuse of power.

Seriously Herb I do believe you’re smarter than just parroting the DNC talking points. “Well, Bush did it, Reagan did it, the Republicans do it, nya, nya, nya, so THERE!”

As I have already stated it is BAD policy no matter WHAT party is doing it and it should be STOPPED.

It was Obama, not Bush I, not Bush II, not Regean, who used his lying rhetoric to mis-direct the public into thinking he would bring transparency and integrity to the office. What he has done in action is anything but.

And as the ABC story states:
The act of presidential piggybacking — coupling official duties, in this case a speech on the economy, with political fundraising — was not pioneered by Obama but is prominently on display this year.

Translation: Obama’s not only doing anything to stop the disgusting practice, he’s doubling down. (Me thinks he’s going for the “honor” of having his face permanently placed in Merriam-Webster next to the hypocrite definition.